Suppose I write:

{raS retlhDaq Qot voDleH; pa' Qotbogh je nuvpu'vaD jatlh..}

for:

"the emperor was reclining next to the table; he said for the people who were reclining there too.."

Would the klingon sentence be grammatically correct ? I'm troubled by the {je} following a {-bogh} clause, and I don't know whether the {pa'} can refer *only* to the {Qotbogh}.

I know I could express the desired meaning in other ways too, but I can't stop wondering whether the klingon sentence is actually correct.

As others have said, it's not grammatically wrong, but it is difficult to follow, with a locative attached to a relative clause attached to a beneficiary attached to a verb.

You can simplify it: raS retlhDaq Qot voDleH latlh je; latlhvaD jatlh voDleH...

-- 
SuStel
http://trimboli.name